I know a lot of photographers frown with going to the Zoo to take pictures, but I disagree. I think the Zoo is great practice for all kinds of different shots. So here are a few when I went to the Zoo.

Well, since only few of us can afford to go on a photo safari to Africa or travel all the way to Australia in order to see koalas in the wild, for most the zoo is the only place to go and look at the kind of animals that don't have their natural habitats where you are. So the zoo IS the place for you to go and photograph animals other than what comes to your backyard or lives in the woods that surround you (provided you've GOT woods surrounding your place).

Which is why I personally think that taking photos of zoo animals is perfectly legitimate if you go visiting a zoo, and that it is a good experience to try and capture GOOD photos of zoo animals, too. Sometimes (or often?) zoo photography even forces you to become creative about the fences - all of that being steps for you to take.

So yes, on the rare occasions I go to a zoo, I'm bound to have my camera on me and take photos of captured animals.

Like you did here. Unfortunately, in many cases the light is not to your best advantage, such as in the case of the first photo showed here, where there was too little light for you to get a sharp, well-focussed photo. Which is a pity. But if this one's the only one you got of this particular wild cat (what is he exactly?), then ok.

Light apparently also was an issue in the case of the two of the little monkey, they're a bit soft.

After those, the other three look technically sound, in focus, and I like the koala and the parrots or loris - sorry, I can't tell those apart.

I know a lot of photographers frown with going to the Zoo to take pictures, but I disagree. I think the Zoo is great practice for all kinds of different shots.

Click to expand...

The zoo is a great place to go to practice your animal photography. What I hate is when people attempt to pass off caged photos as true wildlife shots.

You have a couple of decent shots there, but you can tell that some were shot through glass, a few are OOF, and good perspectives are difficult to achieve. Of the ones you have posted, the Koala came out the best.

Well, since only few of us can afford to go on a photo safari to Africa or travel all the way to Australia in order to see koalas in the wild, for most the zoo is the only place to go and look at the kind of animals that don't have their natural habitats where you are. So the zoo IS the place for you to go and photograph animals other than what comes to your backyard or lives in the woods that surround you (provided you've GOT woods surrounding your place).

Which is why I personally think that taking photos of zoo animals is perfectly legitimate if you go visiting a zoo, and that it is a good experience to try and capture GOOD photos of zoo animals, too. Sometimes (or often?) zoo photography even forces you to become creative about the fences - all of that being steps for you to take.

So yes, on the rare occasions I go to a zoo, I'm bound to have my camera on me and take photos of captured animals.

Like you did here. Unfortunately, in many cases the light is not to your best advantage, such as in the case of the first photo showed here, where there was too little light for you to get a sharp, well-focussed photo. Which is a pity. But if this one's the only one you got of this particular wild cat (what is he exactly?), then ok.

Light apparently also was an issue in the case of the two of the little monkey, they're a bit soft.

After those, the other three look technically sound, in focus, and I like the koala and the parrots or loris - sorry, I can't tell those apart.

Click to expand...

I agree. I believe there is NOTHING wrong with zoo shots!

The only issues I ever see with zoo shots are the backgrounds, and compositions that tell the viewer you are at a zoo. It is fun to make the viewer feel as though you shot those in the wild, or on safari (where possible).

As for the photos, I believe you missed the focus on almost all of them, with the 4th being your best shot, and 5th being the least favorite due to the trouble seeing the birds in the background.

I know a lot of photographers frown with going to the Zoo to take pictures, but I disagree. I think the Zoo is great practice for all kinds of different shots.

Click to expand...

The zoo is a great place to go to practice your animal photography. What I hate is when people attempt to pass off caged photos as true wildlife shots.

You have a couple of decent shots there, but you can tell that some were shot through glass, a few are OOF, and good perspectives are difficult to achieve. Of the ones you have posted, the Koala came out the best.

What Phrankey said is not too hard to understand. While, when you're lucky enough to be in a zoo with not "too much fence action" going on, you can try to find angles where the fact that it is actually a zoo can be sort of "taken out", you still should not go out and tell people that you saw these animals in their natural habitats but STILL admit to the fact that you took the photos in a zoo. That's all, I think.

What Phrankey said is not too hard to understand. While, when you're lucky enough to be in a zoo with not "too much fence action" going on, you can try to find angles where the fact that it is actually a zoo can be sort of "taken out", you still should not go out and tell people that you saw these animals in their natural habitats but STILL admit to the fact that you took the photos in a zoo. That's all, I think.

Click to expand...

I think if you can make an animal in the zoo appear to be in the wild, then +10 points for you, and let the viewer put that animal where ever they want in their mind. If they look at it and feel as though it had to be shot from a bush in Africa, then so be it.
A lion in the zoo is still wild, it is still alive, and still will eat your face off if given the opportunity. His surroundings have changed of course, and anything you can do to make it appear more "natural" the better towards recreating a legitimate wildlife shot.

Well, ok.
But I still think it is fair to openly say "So-and-so park" instead of implying this was taken in the wild. Look up the Photo Themes, I only just added photos to the Theme-thread "A visit to the zoo", and ... well ... feel those might have been in the wild or not...

Well, ok.
But I still think it is fair to openly say "So-and-so park" instead of implying this was taken in the wild. Look up the Photo Themes, I only just added photos to the Theme-thread "A visit to the zoo", and ... well ... feel those might have been in the wild or not...

Click to expand...

This was my point exactly. When I go to a zoo, my whole point is to take photos that don't look like they were taken at a zoo, but I don't go around saying "I went to India, sat in the Himalayan mountains for a month, and took these great shots of this tiger..." I fully disclose where they were shot. I guess this is just a point of principle on my part.

You as the artist taking the photo, are creating something you hope to spark emotion with the viewer. Whatever illusions you create should be taken however the viewer sees them.
If I was posting something like that online I wouldn't make the caption "just a lion in a zoo".